[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

# RE: exact name of a property

- Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 15:51:45 PDT
- From:
- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

    > Maybe with like verb_info(), property_info() can return something like
    > {owner,perms,propertyname}.. I don't think this should be a problem with any
    > other code, since I've already tried it with a $bf_property_info and nothing
    > else seems to break.

    Random warning:
    I strongly suspect a fair amount of code will be rewritten (...insert
    tuneless whistle ...) to take advantage of the new scattering assignment
    available in 1.8.0.  Thus, while most code may, at the moment, still be
    in the form

       pi = property_info(obj,vb);
       owner = pi[1];
       flags = pi[2];

    and not break due to your change, I don't doubt that code like

       {owner, flags} = property_info(obj, vb);

    will become prevalent in the future.  Nor would I want to do anything to
    discourage this.

    In general, I would be extremely wary of using the $bf_foo wrappers to
    actually change the contract of a builtin function (i.e., what arguments
    it expects, what it returns).  Even the possibility of raising errors
    other than what the programmers manual specifies should be documented
    carefully, if only for the sake of preserving the sanity of your
    programmers, let alone the question of placing unnecessary obstacles in
    the path of those who might want to port stuff to your MOO.

    9 times out of 10, you can probably just write your own function to do
    what you want rather than usurping a builtin.

- Prev: Re: exact name of a property
- Next: FUP
- Index: MOO-cows
- Thread: MOO-cows

Home | Subject Index | Thread Index